That's like my friend who purchased a pickup truck because he needs to get lumber once a year for renovations or home projects. My local home depot lets me take their truck for $20 plus gas. If I compare to the extra $20 a week I'd have to pay to drive a pickup, I'd say I win by owning a regular sedan.
Are you telling me that you don't see the technology improving? There is still lots of room for solar cells to improve. In addition batteries are also getting better by the minute. Combine better solar efficiency for less money with better storage capacity and you have yourself a neat power plant on the roof of your house. Add to this more efficient electronics and it's whole order ball game.
For residential use, solar energy is very plausible. My neighbour had a portion of his roof covered and it cost him less than $30 000. He generated 720 KW in the month of November which was mostly cloudy. At 15 cents per KW that's a $108 saving. Not bad for a cloudy month.
Although I think that 2030 is far too optimistic to see large power plants replaced with clean self generated energy, I believe it's going to happen sooner than you think.
I have a different view of facebook. It's a place where I can reconnect or even stay in contact with people I've met over the years. I think that after linkedin it's one of the best networking tools out there. For another product to come and replace this one it would have to be seamless from the user's point of view.
I never type facebook.com or search it. I click the app icon on my phone. Seems their number coincide very much with the popularity growth of smart phones.
These people should focus on other studies. This is a waste of time for anybody to read.
All I can read in that post is: "ME MYSELF AND I". That's the new way of thinking. I see it everywhere I go.
The sacrifices benefit us regardless of global warming so I don't understand the reluctance to be inclined to help by making simple non obstructive life changes.
BTW, if you require antibiotics you are in some cases choosing to die if you do not take them. The human body isn't able to deal with all types of bacterial infections and often results in a slow painful death. For a doctor to truly know if you need antibiotics is to perform a culture test. This test determines if it's viral or bacterial. If viral, the antibiotics are useless but otherwise they are required.
Actually the changes can be much simpler than that. How about picking a more efficient vehicle when you buy one. I have friends that buy Pickup Trucks just because that's what they want to drive. Well damn, I hope the gas prices triple so they regret that decision. How about joining programs like the one offered by the Ontario government which funds almost 100% the purchase of solar panels. How about recycling. Recycling saves tones of power yet I still see companies throw paper in the garbage. Where I work we were throwing 60 000 pages in the garbage until we implemented a recycling program.
As for BELIEVING. Nobody is being asked to make harsh decisions but rather just be willing to continue investing in forward thinking. Our dependence on volatile fuel sources is an issue that is completely unrelated to global warming and must be solved. That's the angle I would push for.
By forcing consumers into greener solutions we pave the way to progress.
I'm curious. If your doctor tells you that you need antibiotics, do you go and question everything he says and ask to see proof that it works?
There's a very large group of scientist that BELIEVE this is a problem. Acting now will not harm us, it can only improve our current life style. If we don't start pushing solutions that are more green, other problems will eventually arise such as lack of resources.
Believe in climate change, it can only bring good in the end. If it's a big scam, at least we know it's not the oil companies paying for it.
I just wanted to add that there is no harm to collectively start acting now. We don't have to spend tones of money, we just have to make small efforts.
Recycling, managing car travels, and buying a efficient vehicles are a few simple ways to save. Just making smart decisions daily can make a world of difference.
Myth Buster actually had a very good episode proving that just changing your driving style could save you up to 40% on gasoline.
A - There are simple experiments that prove that greenhouse gas traps heat that would normally dissipate much quicker resulting in warmer oceans and melting caps (Not the only factors but one worth including in the equasion)
B - Really? There is enough research data showing that city smog can increase localized temperature by as much a 3 Celsius.
C - Nobody said we had to take all our savings and dump them into eco solutions. The idea here is to motivate the population to embrace change which results in further research which equals into better, more affordable solutions.
People will believe what makes them feel better about themselves. I once knew a guy who didn't recycle. His excuse for not doing so was: "They can't even handle all the recycling volume they receive so why bother?".
I never said that. Considering the fact that the average life of the product is currently 2 years and most devices offer between 16 and 64gb. Some with expansion slots that allow an extra 64GB max. My point is that why do you need more at the present time. It's a legitimate question.
Interesting number and I believe them. Cell phones are often broken, lost, stolen or simply upgraded well before the 3 year plan is over. This creates a huge hardware life cycle. Something the PC market doesn't have (except maybe for low end laptops)
I think no matter how poorly Mac or Windows do, the phone fills all computer requirements for MANY users today. The need for a desktop and even laptop PC diminishes as providers adapt to user needs.
What the heck do you guys put on your phones to need more than 64GB? I have an Windows phone running on the same hardware as the S3 so I can expand but I don't see the need. Either people are too lazy to plan or don't know how to. I've never needed more than 64GB. If I put my whole music collection then maybe but why do that when you only listen to 10% of it.
As for movies, maybe you younger users out there don't mind watching a movie on a small display but I can assure you that I don't enjoy the experience.
Yes, 97% of readers (including me) agree but when actually in the decision making seat it's different. What I mean is that defending what we already have is more important than advancement. We always work hard to protect what we have. A good example of this is insurance. We buy insurance on the most ridiculous things because we fear losing in the end. The reality is that statistically you probably would come out a winner if you didn't buy insurance or extended warranties. It's just what we do.
I understand the 3rd point but it's not revenge, its still control AKA justice.
See this scenario: Man murders neighbour's family. Revenge would be for the justice system to murder his family. Instead we punish him to avoid further damages to society. Am I wrong in still thinking there's a clear line between revenge and justice?
I don't see the definition of revenge in your argument.
- I don't speed because I don't want the fine that comes with it - That's not revenge, it's control - I don't drink before driving because I don't want to lose my driver's license - That's not revenge, it's control - I don't kill people because I find it morally wrong and I would not live with myself - That's just morals I was though by my parents and surroundings
The justice system is about control, not revenge. Revenge is you slap me I slap you and that's not what the justice system is about. If it fails in some areas I can assure you is succeeds in many others.
Although I'm sure that drunk car driving case is not the only one I'm sure it accounts for a tiny fraction of what actually happens to drunk drivers. Thousands more drunk drivers are caught everyday and prosecuted as expected. I think picking the one stained case out of the bucket makes the justice system look far worst than it really is.
Having played with it a lot more recently my opinion changed. ALTHOUGH I love the sharp look and smooth operation that comes with Windows 8 ready applications I hate it for everything else. Windows prior to 8 was a representation of the real world (a desk). You could see all apps running in the task bar, close them the same way you would put away documents on a desk. Windows 8 gives the user TUNNEL VISION. That's the main reason I haven't switched.
Windows 8 is like a car with just 2 gauges (fuel and odometer) and windows to see where you're going.
Slashdot Mirror
Not sure about that but I'll say that I had fun reading both articles in full.
Anybody at the top of it's industry is going to be a bully. Apple is for sure, Android is too but nowhere near what MS and Apple are.
BTW, LOL at the One Microsoft Way comment.
Yeah and that blond girl comes with the car I purchased right?
That's like my friend who purchased a pickup truck because he needs to get lumber once a year for renovations or home projects. My local home depot lets me take their truck for $20 plus gas. If I compare to the extra $20 a week I'd have to pay to drive a pickup, I'd say I win by owning a regular sedan.
Are you telling me that you don't see the technology improving? There is still lots of room for solar cells to improve. In addition batteries are also getting better by the minute. Combine better solar efficiency for less money with better storage capacity and you have yourself a neat power plant on the roof of your house. Add to this more efficient electronics and it's whole order ball game.
For residential use, solar energy is very plausible. My neighbour had a portion of his roof covered and it cost him less than $30 000. He generated 720 KW in the month of November which was mostly cloudy. At 15 cents per KW that's a $108 saving. Not bad for a cloudy month.
Although I think that 2030 is far too optimistic to see large power plants replaced with clean self generated energy, I believe it's going to happen sooner than you think.
I have a different view of facebook. It's a place where I can reconnect or even stay in contact with people I've met over the years. I think that after linkedin it's one of the best networking tools out there. For another product to come and replace this one it would have to be seamless from the user's point of view.
I never type facebook.com or search it. I click the app icon on my phone. Seems their number coincide very much with the popularity growth of smart phones.
These people should focus on other studies. This is a waste of time for anybody to read.
All I can read in that post is: "ME MYSELF AND I". That's the new way of thinking. I see it everywhere I go.
The sacrifices benefit us regardless of global warming so I don't understand the reluctance to be inclined to help by making simple non obstructive life changes.
BTW, if you require antibiotics you are in some cases choosing to die if you do not take them. The human body isn't able to deal with all types of bacterial infections and often results in a slow painful death. For a doctor to truly know if you need antibiotics is to perform a culture test. This test determines if it's viral or bacterial. If viral, the antibiotics are useless but otherwise they are required.
Actually the changes can be much simpler than that. How about picking a more efficient vehicle when you buy one. I have friends that buy Pickup Trucks just because that's what they want to drive. Well damn, I hope the gas prices triple so they regret that decision. How about joining programs like the one offered by the Ontario government which funds almost 100% the purchase of solar panels. How about recycling. Recycling saves tones of power yet I still see companies throw paper in the garbage. Where I work we were throwing 60 000 pages in the garbage until we implemented a recycling program.
As for BELIEVING. Nobody is being asked to make harsh decisions but rather just be willing to continue investing in forward thinking. Our dependence on volatile fuel sources is an issue that is completely unrelated to global warming and must be solved. That's the angle I would push for.
By forcing consumers into greener solutions we pave the way to progress.
I'm curious. If your doctor tells you that you need antibiotics, do you go and question everything he says and ask to see proof that it works?
There's a very large group of scientist that BELIEVE this is a problem. Acting now will not harm us, it can only improve our current life style. If we don't start pushing solutions that are more green, other problems will eventually arise such as lack of resources.
Believe in climate change, it can only bring good in the end. If it's a big scam, at least we know it's not the oil companies paying for it.
Great response.
I just wanted to add that there is no harm to collectively start acting now. We don't have to spend tones of money, we just have to make small efforts.
Recycling, managing car travels, and buying a efficient vehicles are a few simple ways to save. Just making smart decisions daily can make a world of difference.
Myth Buster actually had a very good episode proving that just changing your driving style could save you up to 40% on gasoline.
Wait a second.
A - There are simple experiments that prove that greenhouse gas traps heat that would normally dissipate much quicker resulting in warmer oceans and melting caps (Not the only factors but one worth including in the equasion)
B - Really? There is enough research data showing that city smog can increase localized temperature by as much a 3 Celsius.
C - Nobody said we had to take all our savings and dump them into eco solutions. The idea here is to motivate the population to embrace change which results in further research which equals into better, more affordable solutions.
People will believe what makes them feel better about themselves. I once knew a guy who didn't recycle. His excuse for not doing so was: "They can't even handle all the recycling volume they receive so why bother?".
My 2 cents
I never said that. Considering the fact that the average life of the product is currently 2 years and most devices offer between 16 and 64gb. Some with expansion slots that allow an extra 64GB max. My point is that why do you need more at the present time. It's a legitimate question.
Interesting number and I believe them. Cell phones are often broken, lost, stolen or simply upgraded well before the 3 year plan is over. This creates a huge hardware life cycle. Something the PC market doesn't have (except maybe for low end laptops)
I think no matter how poorly Mac or Windows do, the phone fills all computer requirements for MANY users today. The need for a desktop and even laptop PC diminishes as providers adapt to user needs.
What the heck do you guys put on your phones to need more than 64GB? I have an Windows phone running on the same hardware as the S3 so I can expand but I don't see the need. Either people are too lazy to plan or don't know how to. I've never needed more than 64GB. If I put my whole music collection then maybe but why do that when you only listen to 10% of it.
As for movies, maybe you younger users out there don't mind watching a movie on a small display but I can assure you that I don't enjoy the experience.
I don't know. You don't really know what you're getting when you buy drugs and who know what diseases the girl on the corner has.
Yes, 97% of readers (including me) agree but when actually in the decision making seat it's different. What I mean is that defending what we already have is more important than advancement. We always work hard to protect what we have. A good example of this is insurance. We buy insurance on the most ridiculous things because we fear losing in the end. The reality is that statistically you probably would come out a winner if you didn't buy insurance or extended warranties. It's just what we do.
My 2 cents.
So the line here is that no extra people die. Doesn't sound like revenge any more. Revenge avoided.
I understand the 3rd point but it's not revenge, its still control AKA justice.
See this scenario: Man murders neighbour's family. Revenge would be for the justice system to murder his family. Instead we punish him to avoid further damages to society. Am I wrong in still thinking there's a clear line between revenge and justice?
"Pure Corporate Evil"???
Are you one of the care bears?
The H/W support and other features of Windows 8 were completely overshadowed by the interface. Fix the interface and maybe MS gets a third chance.
I don't see the definition of revenge in your argument.
- I don't speed because I don't want the fine that comes with it - That's not revenge, it's control
- I don't drink before driving because I don't want to lose my driver's license - That's not revenge, it's control
- I don't kill people because I find it morally wrong and I would not live with myself - That's just morals I was though by my parents and surroundings
The justice system is about control, not revenge. Revenge is you slap me I slap you and that's not what the justice system is about. If it fails in some areas I can assure you is succeeds in many others.
Although I'm sure that drunk car driving case is not the only one I'm sure it accounts for a tiny fraction of what actually happens to drunk drivers. Thousands more drunk drivers are caught everyday and prosecuted as expected. I think picking the one stained case out of the bucket makes the justice system look far worst than it really is.
True of Justin Bieber too.
Having played with it a lot more recently my opinion changed. ALTHOUGH I love the sharp look and smooth operation that comes with Windows 8 ready applications I hate it for everything else. Windows prior to 8 was a representation of the real world (a desk). You could see all apps running in the task bar, close them the same way you would put away documents on a desk. Windows 8 gives the user TUNNEL VISION. That's the main reason I haven't switched.
Windows 8 is like a car with just 2 gauges (fuel and odometer) and windows to see where you're going.